This website uses cookies to give you the best user experience, for analytics, and improvement of functionalities of this website and third party sites. You can learn more about our use of cookies and similar technologies and your choices by reviewing our Cookies Policy. By clicking "I agree" you agree to our use of cookies and similar technologies.

The item you have requested is not currently available in English and you have been redirected to the next available page. You may use your browser's back button to return to the item you were viewing.

With 125+ locations in 50+ countries, Dentons is home to top-tier talent that is found at the intersection of geography, industry knowledge and substantive legal experience. Working with Dentons, you will have the opportunity to learn from the best lawyers in the industry at the largest law firm in the world.

The Competition and Markets Authority's consultation on "Competition in passenger rail services in Great Britain"

The Competition and Markets Authority's consultation on "Competition in passenger rail services in Great Britain"

On 17 July 2015, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published its consultation document.

The Competition and Markets Authority's consultation on "Competition in passenger rail services in Great Britain"

On 17 July 2015, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published its consultation document.

Regional Capabilities:

August 13, 2015

On 17 July 2015, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published its consultation document regarding competition in passenger rail services in Great Britain. This followed its announcement in January that it intended to undertake work in this area. Since then, it has taken soundings from a wide variety of railway industry stakeholders including the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), franchised train operating companies, open access operators and applicants for open access status, Network Rail and freight industry and passenger representatives.

CMA remit

Before considering the detail of the issues that the CMA is consulting on, it is worth pausing to consider its remit for instigating such a consultation. The CMA's consultation document explains that its statutory duty is to promote competition for the benefit of consumers. It also notes that intervention such as this is part of its "key role in challenging government where government is creating barriers to competition". This key role is set out for the CMA in the government's "strategic steer" for the CMA, published when the CMA was created in 2013 and to be updated imminently. The strategic steer is a non-binding ministerial statement of strategic priorities for the CMA, and it makes clear that the government wants the CMA to examine markets to see how competition can be improved. This is the first consultation of this type that the CMA has issued in reliance on these provisions.

Scope and timing

The CMA indicates that its objectives in issuing the consultation are to seek improvements in the railways in Great Britain and benefits for passengers and taxpayers by, for example, securing better value for money, enhancing service quality, encouraging innovation and unlocking efficiencies. The CMA is clear that it does not want any recommendations resulting from its consultation to disrupt the current and forthcoming rounds of franchise awards or impact adversely on areas such as investment in the network or the provision of services that are socially valuable but not commercially viable. Thus, it does not envisage any of the options explored in the consultation coming into effect until after the end of the current rail franchise terms, which would be around 2023. The CMA therefore sees this consultation as the start of a long-term debate. It is also clear that the options the CMA suggests are not intended for commuter services, due to the different competition considerations that apply to them. The CMA's view is that the proposals, if implemented, would be likely to deliver most benefits on three major intercity routes: the East and West Coast Main Lines and Great Western.

Competition "for" the market and competition "in" the market

As the CMA sets out, the competitive model that currently applies to the vast majority of Great Britain's passenger railways is a model that sees competition "for" the market by way of franchise bidding for the right to operate specified services for a period of between 7 and 15 years. The CMA's view is that this competitive approach has delivered benefits, including increased capacity and improved passenger satisfaction. The CMA also recognises that there have been recent changes to franchising following the Brown review of franchising in 2012-13, and, in general, seems to view these changes as positive contributions to competition. It notes that there is also a limited amount of competition "in" the market, which arises by way of overlapping or parallel franchise routes and also where open access operators have successfully applied to the ORR for the right to run a specific service in competition with a franchised operator.

In this context, the driving question behind the CMA's consultation document is whether significant improvements could be achieved by introducing a greater degree of competition in the market, which it refers to as "head-to-head on-rail competition".

The options put forward by the CMA

The four options put forward by the CMA to increase on-rail competition are as follows:

The proposal is that, in return for their increased access, open access operators would pay proportionately towards fixed track access charges and also pay a universal service levy. This is intended to make up for shortfalls in government revenues from the lower franchise premiums that the CMA considers would result in such a model and help fund unprofitable "social" rail services. The intention is that franchisees and open access operators would have broadly similar risks and charges in this model. The CMA believes that this would allow the ORR to review and potentially remove the "not primarily abstractive" test that it currently applies when considering open access applications.

The CMA's view is that this approach would be broadly in line with open access systems in some other European countries, and that it could drive greater competitive pressure on fares, efficiency savings, improved service quality and significant innovation. The key disadvantages of such an approach highlighted in the CMA's paper are the risk of a possible adverse effect on government funds from lower franchise premia and the possibility that it will lead to a loss of economies of scale.

Option 2: Two franchisees for each franchise.

The proposal is that each of the two franchisees would be responsible for a specified proportion of the franchised services, but exactly how the services would be split between them would depend upon the services concerned. For example, services could be split 50:50 or there could be an anchor franchisee responsible for socially valuable but unprofitable services, with both franchisees then being responsible for a share of the potentially profitable services. The CMA's view is that this approach would result in greater competitive pressure on fares and incentives to improve service levels and deliver efficiencies. It suggests that the disadvantages are the same as those outlined for Option 1. The CMA also notes that the potential for innovation and efficiencies may be more limited in Option 2 than in Option 1, depending on the way in which the services are split between franchisees.

Option 3: More overlapping franchises.

This proposal is essentially to reverse the decision taken by the Strategic Rail Authority in the years following privatisation that saw overlapping routes removed as much as possible. The CMA's suggestion is that the franchise map could be remodelled over time to reintroduce overlapping routes and thus increase head-to-head on-rail competition. The CMA considers that this option should lead to lower fares for passengers and growth in passenger numbers. An accompanying reduction in franchise specification would also allow competition other than on price, leading to innovation. This option would not require a change to the existing legal framework. The key disadvantages identified by the CMA are broadly the same as for Option 1. However, the CMA indicates that such an approach may limit the dynamics of the market more than some of the other options as there is no potential for franchisees to take over each other's services outside of franchise competitions.

This option would involve replacing the franchising system with a system akin to competition between open access operators within the framework of a licensed regime that places restrictions and obligations on operators. Licences could be established by an administrative body, or tendered for by licensees through a trading-based system. The CMA's view is that this would generate strong competitive pressure on prices and incentives to improve service quality and that it would be more flexible than Options 2 and 3. The disadvantages identified include the potential for loss of economies of scale and also possible increased costs of administering a larger number of operators.

Next steps

It will be interesting to see whether this consultation sparks the long-term debate that the CMA intends it to. The consultation papers suggest that the CMA intends to make recommendations based on one or more of the options it is proposing although it stresses that it has not reached a view as to which is to be preferred.

The proposals it puts forward, particularly proposals 2 and 4, certainly have the potential to change the face of the industry significantly. There are, however, several other significant reviews and consultations currently going on in the industry, which may lead to changes that impact on competition in the industry within the timescale in which the CMA intends the debate to continue. Their impact on the options offered by the CMA could be substantial. They include the Shaw report on Network Rail, which will look at the long-term future shape and financing of Network Rail. The ORR is also reviewing the structure of track access charges and related charges paid to Network Rail. In addition to such policy and structural considerations, the CMA recognises that technical constraints on the industry are likely to evolve during the timescale of the debate. For example, it notes that capacity constraints may relax as a result of Network Rail's enhancement programme. It may well be, therefore, that the CMA has to update its proposals as the industry evolves.

Consultation responses are due by 16 October 2015, after which the CMA intends to undertake further work before recommending one of the options consulted upon.

Disclaimer

Unsolicited emails and other information sent to Dentons will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others, may not receive a response, and do not create a lawyer-client relationship. If you are not already a client of Dentons, please do not send us any confidential information.

Copy link to Tweet

Embed this Tweet

Important Notice

Please read the following terms and conditions carefully. Access to the information contained herein is on the basis that you understand and agree to these terms and conditions.

The following pages of the website are not addressed to, or intended for use by:
(1) persons located in the United States,
(2) citizens of the United States
(3) permanent residents ('green card holders') of the United States,
(4) entities organized in the United States or their overseas affiliates.

No person or entity falling into any of the above categories has contributed to the creation or provision of any of the information provided in these pages.

Under Sanctions imposed by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control, persons and entities falling into these categories are prohibited from engaging, or facilitating the engagement by others, in any commercial relationship with Iran. If you believe you may fall into any of these categories, do not access these web pages.

Under sanctions imposed by the Government of Canada, Canadian citizens and persons located in Canada should be aware that they are prohibited from engaging in or facilitating the engagement of others in, certain commercial activities involving Iran or certain persons (individuals and entities) in Iran. In addition, the sanctions law of other countries, including the United States, may apply to certain commercial activities by Canadians. Any Canadian or person in Canada who accesses these webpages should seek legal advice on the applicability of Canadian and foreign sanctions before engaging in or facilitating in any commercial activities involving Iran or persons in Iran.

Dentons accepts no liability in respect of any breach of applicable Sanctions arising as a consequence of acting against this advice. The following pages of this website are informational materials only and are not intended to be used, nor may they be used, to engage in, or facilitate the engagement by others in, transactions that are prohibited under the laws of the United States or Canada. For guidance on the applicability of relevant Sanctions, please contact legal counsel. If you would like to engage attorneys at Dentons familiar with these issues please contact : Michael Zolandz, US, Paul Lalonde, Canada

Confirmation of understanding and acceptance of disclaimer

To visit the following pages of the website, you must confirm that you have understood the above sentences and agree to comply with the restrictions and that your use of the following pages is expressly conditioned thereon. By clicking "AGREE" in the box below, you will be deemed to have made this confirmation.

I have read and understood the disclaimer set out above. I understand that it may affect my rights and I agree to be bound by its terms.